Support NeoGAF

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Profits are important, no point having a high revenue and not making any money.

Maybe if you're a shareholder. Like I literally said in what you quoted.

 

[phil_t98]

Maybe if you're a shareholder. Like I literally said in what you quoted.

But i never get the obsession with gamers on sales and money a company takes. It’s just a big dick measuring contest lol

 

[azertydu91]

But i never get the obsession with gamers on sales and money a company takes. It’s just a big dick measuring contest lol

What is interesting though is the ratio revue/profit becauuse it shows how each branch reinvest into games, r&d and hardware.
It shows one of the problems I have with Nintendo, because they ave a high revenue even though they're 3rd based on this thread by revenue,but they're n1 at profit I believe, which means that they are investing way less on games etc.
That means that they are only investing at least halff of what sony is for example.
So all in all revenue is interesting to see how popular a brand is, which is useless, profit tells us how much they gain from it but the ratio of both indicates how much of that revenue goes back into games etc...

 

[Rickyiez]

Damn. Sony is absolutely crushing the competition. Now they should use some of that $$$ and buy more studios to continue this domination.

I'm surprised take two and epic are so low though.

They are demolishing their own studios instead sadly

 

[RJMacready73]

Yeah but they are winding their tentacles into many aspects of PC and console gaming too. Hopefully they wont be able to negatively effect too much.

It'll be a slow, drawn out process over many years.. the Chinese are buying into all these western media companies for one thing and one thing only, to slowly influence and manipulate western views towards the cunts

 

[Excess]

Maybe if you're a shareholder.

Not just shareholders. What's important about financials is how they not only reveal where a company currently is, but also where it's going. We want to be able to predict the health of these companies, and there all sorts of variables to consider, notwithstanding some of the inaccurate comparisons between them, such as the hardware/network gaming division of SNE to that of a publisher such as ATVI.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Not just shareholders. What's important about financials is how they not only reveal where a company currently is, but also where it's going. We want to be able to predict the health of these companies, and there all sorts of variables to consider, notwithstanding some of the inaccurate comparisons between them, such as the hardware/network gaming division of SNE to that of a publisher such as ATVI.

We're not talking about "financials," we're talking about profits. And profits don't help you predict much of anything. A highly profitable company can be profitable because it doesn't properly reinvest in its business - you have no way of knowing that from looking at profits alone.

 

[Excess]

We're not talking about "financials," we're talking about profits. And profits don't help you predict much of anything. A highly profitable company can be profitable because it doesn't properly reinvest in its business - you have no way of knowing that from looking at profits alone.

Then I'm in agreement with you, there's other variables. I thought you were saying that only shareholders care about profits.

 

[phil_t98]

What is interesting though is the ratio revue/profit becauuse it shows how each branch reinvest into games, r&d and hardware.
It shows one of the problems I have with Nintendo, because they ave a high revenue even though they're 3rd based on this thread by revenue,but they're n1 at profit I believe, which means that they are investing way less on games etc.
That means that they are only investing at least halff of what sony is for example.
So all in all revenue is interesting to see how popular a brand is, which is useless, profit tells us how much they gain from it but the ratio of both indicates how much of that revenue goes back into games etc...

R&D is no it done over a year its every year, also with the revenue you dont know if its getting put into games or hardware or something else its all guesswork

 

[azertydu91]

R&D is no it done over a year its every year, also with the revenue you dont know if its getting put into games or hardware or something else its all guesswork

Sure if you talk about the whole brand but when taking into account only the interested division then the numbers talk.
Sure you can't know exactly how that money is invested, but it doesn't change the fact hat it is invested in the division which is at least the promise of games or services or hardware or even all of them.
Once again taking the Nintendo example they have about half the revenue of Sony yet are ahead in profit, this mean that they invest way less than sony.
How that money is invested is indeed an unknown but it is evident that this revenue get invested into something interesting for the gamers, whatever it is.
So be it hardware, service, games or all of them it is a good thing for the consumer.
Look at Xbox it's been rumored they haven't made a profit with their Xbox division wether that's true or not is not the point but it shows that they are willing to invest (as we've seen with all the aquisitions).Exactly like sony having way higher revenue yet less profit than Nintendo and it shows again with the creation of visual arts and san diego studio (I'm not so sure about the studios name I need to check them and will modifiy accordingly).We've seen both of them invest massively into studios and that will result in more games obviously.
And lastly sure R&D won't show ponctually but taking multiple quarter reports and their revenue/profit can give a big picture idea.

 

[Zeroing]

But i never get the obsession with gamers on sales and money a company takes. It’s just a big dick measuring contest lol

Bingo! And it is a sign that the marketing for the brand is working. Making people identify/associate themselves with the company and/or with their product(s) to a very deep personal level.

I used to work as a designer in marketing, not my proudest moment.

 

[OptimistPrime]

We're not talking about "financials," we're talking about profits. And profits don't help you predict much of anything. A highly profitable company can be profitable because it doesn't properly reinvest in its business - you have no way of knowing that from looking at profits alone.

You seem hung up on reporting periods. Money that’s reported as profit this year could be spent on R&D next year. It could be used to pay salaries if sales slow down next year. Is a company kind and responsible for spending money the year they make it and greedy shareholder-loving jerks if they spend it the next fiscal year?

Companies keeping cash around is desirable for shareholders sure, but it’s healthy for the company and provides stability for the employees and any customers that rely on the business.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

You seem hung up on reporting periods. Money that’s reported as profit this year could be spent on R&D next year. It could be used to pay salaries if sales slow down next year. Is a company kind and responsible for spending money the year they make it and greedy shareholder-loving jerks if they spend it the next fiscal year?

Companies keeping cash around is desirable for shareholders sure, but it’s healthy for the company and provides stability for the employees and any customers that rely on the business.

You're not talking about profits then, you're talking about cash on hand. Sony has like three times as much cash on hand as Nintendo does.

 

[phil_t98]

Sure if you talk about the whole brand but when taking into account only the interested division then the numbers talk.
Sure you can't know exactly how that money is invested, but it doesn't change the fact hat it is invested in the division which is at least the promise of games or services or hardware or even all of them.
Once again taking the Nintendo example they have about half the revenue of Sony yet are ahead in profit, this mean that they invest way less than sony.
How that money is invested is indeed an unknown but it is evident that this revenue get invested into something interesting for the gamers, whatever it is.
So be it hardware, service, games or all of them it is a good thing for the consumer.
Look at Xbox it's been rumored they haven't made a profit with their Xbox division wether that's true or not is not the point but it shows that they are willing to invest (as we've seen with all the aquisitions).Exactly like sony having way higher revenue yet less profit than Nintendo and it shows again with the creation of visual arts and san diego studio (I'm not so sure about the studios name I need to check them and will modifiy accordingly).We've seen both of them invest massively into studios and that will result in more games obviously.
And lastly sure R&D won't show ponctually but taking multiple quarter reports and their revenue/profit can give a big picture idea.

How does it mean they invest less than sony? Have you got that as a fact.

Nintendo can invest as much as they like and when you look at a percentage of cost they could spend a bigger percentage of that money on R&D

also just because Sony’s spend more doesn’t mean they do it open R&D , sony heavy advertise their games and consoles, they spend huge amounts on champions league adverts. That’s where all the exta money could be used as an example

 

[OptimistPrime]

You're not talking about profits then, you're talking about cash on hand. Sony has like three times as much cash on hand as Nintendo does.

And where did that cash come from?

What do you think happens to reported profits? Do you think all of it just gets transferred directly to shareholder bank accounts at the end of the year? That would be called a dividend. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo pay something like 0.5-2% of profit to dividends.

 

[azertydu91]

How does it mean they invest less than sony? Have you got that as a fact.

Nintendo can invest as much as they like and when you look at a percentage of cost they could spend a bigger percentage of that money on R&D

also just because Sony’s spend more doesn’t mean they do it open R&D , sony heavy advertise their games and consoles, they spend huge amounts on champions league adverts. That’s where all the exta money could be used as an example

Well it's easy they have less than half the revenue of sony's gaming dvision yet are higher in profit that means less investment.

Edit: Nintendo invest also heavily in commercial especially here in europe I don't know about the US though.That is also also a part of investment in which you are right the gamers do not get something.But I don't think those 10 billions more in revenue are invested solely on commercials

 

[phil_t98]

Well it's easy they have less than half the revenue of sony's gaming dvision yet are higher in profit that means less investment.

It doesn’t mean that at all, like i said there are loads of ways sony are spending more money than Nintendo it doesn’t mean its invest in R&D

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

And where did that cash come from?

What do you think happens to reported profits? Do you think all of it just gets transferred directly to shareholder bank accounts at the end of the year? That would be called a dividend. Sony, Microsoft, Nintendo pay something like 0.5-2% of profit to dividends.

Nintendo is actually notoriously generous in terms of its dividend payouts.

Again, your argument is that what matters is cash on hand, not annual profit. If what you care about is cash on hand, Sony has more of that. If what you care about is R&D, Sony does more of that.

 

[OptimistPrime]

Nintendo is actually notoriously generous in terms of its dividend payouts.

Again, your argument is that what matters is cash on hand, not annual profit. If what you care about is cash on hand, Sony has more of that. If what you care about is R&D, Sony does more of that.

I’m not comparing companies, I’m a fan of most of the companies in question, including Sony. I’m just trying to help you understand more about how business works since you seem to like talking about it on here.

(Also, current annual yield for Nintendo is 2.7%. Highest in past 14 years is just over 4%.)

So anyway, you’re avoiding the question, where do you think the remaining 99% of profits go after dividends? What greedy shareholder thing happens to that money?

 

[azertydu91]

It doesn’t mean that at all, like i said there are loads of ways sony are spending more money than Nintendo it doesn’t mean its invest in R&D

I said r&d, games,services and hardware and yes you were right commercials too, but if sony invest so much more there's a chance that they invest more in games uness you believe they invest all in commercials in which you would be totally wrong.

 

[Rean no Kiseki]

Congratulations to Hudo and his fellow shareholders!

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

I’m just trying to help you understand more about how business works since you seem to like talking about it on here.

It is an objective fact that annual profit tells you nothing about a company's level of investment in its own business.

 

[OptimistPrime]

It is an objective fact that annual profit tells you nothing about a company's level of investment in its own business.

We’re talking about your claim that only shareholders care about profits. You keep trying to move the goalposts.

Since you won’t answer the question, I’ll do it for you. The truth is that the vast majority of profits flow directly into a business’s cash. Profits (for the most part) are cash. Businesses don’t have some special account called “cash” and another account called “profits”. That money is used on the kinds of things you said profit wasn’t used for (future salaries, investing more into the business, etc). If they spend it before the reporting period is over it gets moved to the expenses column, if they spend it after the reporting period it’s the profit column. In short, today’s profit is tomorrow’s payroll or R&D spending. To say it’s only for shareholders is not true.

I’m not 100% sure what your particular situation is, but if you’re like most of the young people out there, you were taught that profit is a very bad word by Vox, YouTube “documentaries”, Michael Moore, and DuckTales. The truth is that a healthy business makes a profit. If I’m an employee or a customer that wants to rely on a business, I want them to make a profit. I want them to have a lot of cash available for stability (which you could roughly equate to accumulated profits).

 

[Hobbygaming]

They are demolishing their own studios instead sadly

They're quietly growing their studios behind the scenes like Sony Santa Monica which is developing 2 titles right now

Sony Japan wasn't really producing but Astrobot is a hit so they will probably focus on that IP for now

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

The truth is that the vast majority of profits flow directly into a business’s cash.

If you care about cash then look at cash on hand. The most accurate way to assess how much cash a business has is to look at how much cash it has.

The truth is that a healthy business makes a profit. If I’m an employee or a customer that wants to rely on a business, I want them to make a profit. I want them to have a lot of cash available for stability (which you could roughly equate to accumulated profits).

If two businesses make healthy profits, which business makes more profit tells you nothing meaningful. The only people who care about that are shareholders.

 

[OptimistPrime]

If you care about cash then look at cash on hand. The most accurate way to assess how much cash a business has is to look at how much cash it has.

If two businesses make healthy profits, which business makes more profit tells you nothing meaningful. The only people who care about that are shareholders.

I’m beginning to think that this is not a good-faith debate Here’s an unsolicited life tip: pride can really get in the way of personal growth. Who knows, maybe I’m some clueless loser. Or many I’m someone that has filed taxes for a corporation multiple times. Consider the possibility that I might have some understanding that you lack.

Anyway, profit tells you if your cash on hand is growing or shrinking. That matters even if you don’t twirl your mustache in dark corners of your mansion. A loss (negative profit) would tell you if your cash is on its way out and your company is at risk for going under. Revenue doesn’t tell you any of that.

 

[Imru’ al-Qays]

Anyway, profit tells you if your cash on hand is growing or shrinking. That matters even if you don’t twirl your mustache in dark corners of your mansion. A loss (negative profit) would tell you if your cash is on its way out and your company is at risk for going under. Revenue doesn’t tell you any of that.

Both Sony and Nintendo are profitable. Which one is more profitable tells us nothing useful. Which one has more revenue tells us something useful.

 

[e&e]

So the discussion in here is about Revenue and investments. Why is it bad (or what I’ve read seems to put it in a negative light) when you spend less on investments? How is investing more but making less profit a good thing?

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Nintendo only does gaming and spent $775m on R&D in 2020. How much did Sony spend on strictly gaming? I couldn't find a number but you seem to know more.

Just a reminder that he couldn't answer this question.